from the um-what? dept

Another day, another attack on a free press. The latest: a long-time reporter, Daniel Heyman, of the Public News Service in West Virginia was arrested for asking questions of Trump administration officials. Heyman yelled some questions to Health & Human Services Director Tom Price along with White House senior advisor Kellyanne Conway:

Daniel Ralph Heyman, 54, with the Public News Service of West Virginia, was freed on $5,000 bond Tuesday night on a charge of "willful disruption of government processes," according to a criminal complaint.

“The above defendant was aggressively breaching the secret service agents to the point where the agents were forced to remove him a couple of times from the area walking up the hallway in the main building of the Capitol,” the complaint states. It adds Heyman caused a disturbance by “yelling questions at Ms. Conway and Secretary Price.”

Whether you like it or not, the press is kind of supposed to ask questions of elected officials. That's their job. And, sure, some will argue that the complaint says that he was "aggressively breaching the secret service agents," but others on the scene indicated nothing beyond ordinary questioning happened:

Valerie Woody, who was there as outreach coordinator for the West Virginia Citizen Action Group, said Price's group was moving quickly down a hallway and Heyman was racing after them.

"I saw nothing in his behavior, I heard nothing that indicated any kind of aggressive behavior or anything like that," she told Public News Service. "Just simple, you know, trying to get somebody's attention and ask them a question. It seems to me there was no violation of anyone's space, or physicality, other than the arrest itself."

And, making matters worse, rather than admitting to over-aggressive enforcement, Price is cheering on the arrest:

Secretary of Health and Human Services Tom Price on Wednesday commended police in West Virginia for “doing what they thought was appropriate” in arresting a journalist who shouted questions at him, but added that it wasn’t his call to say whether they took the proper measures.

Price said the reporter confronted him while he was walking down a hallway. “That gentleman was not in a press conference,” he said.

I'm curious if Price (or anyone else, for that matter) could point to where in the First Amendment there's a rule that says the press is only allowed to ask questions "at a press conference." That's not how it works. There's also this:

Asked Wednesday by STAT whether he thought Heyman should have been arrested, Price said: “That’s not my decision to make.”

Well, that's only partially true. Obviously, the local law enforcement gets to make that decision, but there's nothing stopping a competent public official from telling law enforcement to knock it off and to answer a few basic questions from a reporter.

In an era where we're hearing more and more about both attacks on a free press, as well as the need for a stronger press, these kinds of shenanigans should not be allowed. In the past, when we've covered police arresting reporters, the courts have come out repeatedly in favor of the reporters (that whole First Amendment thing still matters). But that's of little use in the moment when police are dragging reporters off to jail for shouting questions outside a press conference.

from the hey,-wait-a-second... dept

The weird, sickening persecution of Barrett Brown continues. Whether or not you like the guy (and every time we post about him, we hear from people who provide reasons why they dislike him), the way he's been treated by our justice system is despicable. If you don't recall, Brown is an award winning journalist, who certainly went deep with Anonymous and other online groups. Eventually that resulted in him being arrested and harassed by prosecutors for sharing a link. When the infamous Stratfor hacks were released, he shared a link to the files to get people to sift through them. Because some of the files included swiped credit card numbers, he was charged with "trafficking" in stolen credit cards. Oddly, right before trial -- realizing how insane it was to charge him over this -- the feds dropped the charges around linking, but pushed forward on other charges because he hid a laptop in a cabinet and (stupidly...) got angry at the FBI when they came to investigate. The odd part is that following a plea deal, the judge sentenced him to an astounding 63 months in jail -- and cited the sharing of the link (again, those charges were dropped, but it sometimes appeared the judge didn't realize that) to explain why.

According to his mother, who spoke with Brown by phone after his arrest, Brown believes the reason for his re-arrest was a failure to obtain “permission” to give interviews to media organizations. Several weeks ago, Brown was told by his check-in officer that he needed to fill out permission forms before giving interviews.

Since his release, Brown has given numerous interviews, on camera and by phone. But according to his mother, Brown said that the Bureau of Prisons never informed him about a paperwork requirement. When he followed up with his check-in officer, he was given a different form: a liability form for media entering prisons.

Just last week, Brown was interviewed for two days by VICE, and his PBS interview was set for Friday.

Leiderman said he had not been presented with a formal justification for the arrest but was told that it had “to do with failing to abide by BOP restrictions on interviews.”

That's both astounding and frightening at the same time, and seems like a fairly blatant kick in the face to the First Amendment. There appears to be no other reason for his arrest other than his speech in the form of conducting media interviews (often critical of criminal justice system). Nothing about this makes sense, other than out of pure vindictiveness. And, of course, if the idea was to shut him up about this, it seems quite likely to backfire massively. Not only will Brown continue to be able to talk about on this, but it's drawing much more attention to the issue from many others in the press, wondering what kind of world we live in when you can be arrested for agreeing to do media interviews.

from the not-so-free-press dept

We're in something of an era of firsts here in America. We have our first billionaire President, for instance. Add to that that, on his first day as President Elect, Donald Trump saw fit to take to Twitter to take aim at the First Amendment. Fears for what a Trump presidency means for the rights of the press and for free speech rights have compounded since then, supercharged by Trump himself, who has constructed a narrative in which the press is his foil, either because he truly believes that's the case or out of pure political expediency. Whichever the case, we had another first as on the very day of Trump's inauguration, his first day officially as President of the United States, police managed to arrest and charge six journalists for the crime of covering the protests coinciding with the ceremony.

There had already been reports of two such arrests, but we now learn of four more.

A documentary producer, a photojournalist, a live-streamer and a freelance reporter were each charged with the most serious level of offense under Washington DC’s law against rioting, after being caught up in the police action against demonstrators.

The Guardian learned of their arrests after reporting on Monday that the journalists Evan Engel of Vocativ and Alex Rubinstein of RT America had also been arrested and charged with felonies while covering the same unrest on Friday morning.

Six arrests, six journalists charged, and six arraignments and releases pending future hearings in the coming months. The arrest reports for each are remarkably free of any detail on specific actions these individuals are to have undertaken which would violate the law.

None of the arrest reports for the six journalists makes any specific allegations about what any of them are supposed to have done wrong. Keller’s report, which also covers the arrests of an unknown number of unidentified other people, includes a note that a police vehicle was vandalized. “I had absolutely nothing to do with the vandalism,” said Keller.

Reports on the arrests of five of the six journalists contain identical language alleging that “numerous crimes were occurring in police presence”. They state that windows were broken, fires were lit and vehicles were damaged. “The crowd was observed enticing a riot by organizing, promoting, encouraging and participating in acts of violence in furtherance of the riot,” the police reports said.

One of the privileges of American law is typically that it avoids levying legal responsibility on one individual for the actions of others. There's little sense generally in pointing at a crowd of people, a percentage of which are engaging in unlawful behavior, and tossing a legal net over them all. There's even less sense in this when the net catches members of the press, who the public relies on for reporting on newsworthy events. And there's even less sense still when the reporting is on a political matter.

Now, it's not as though it was only upon President Trump's inauguration that journalists were suddenly being arrested while performing their jobs. It happened on several occasions under Barrack Obama, beacon of transparency and press access though he claimed to be. Instead, this is something of a continuation of an attack on a free and open press, buttressed by a President engaged in open warfare with any press outlets he doesn't find favorable.

The signals have been sent since before his inauguration and since: access and information is going to be cut off. In response, several press outlets have announced investments into their investigative reporting teams. If the arrest of those journalists covering their stories continues to be accepted, that doesn't leave the public with much of a press at all.

from the shit-gets-real dept

For many, many, many years, we've been covering the saga of Prenda Law -- a legal operation set up to file tons of shakedown copyright infringement lawsuits in an effort to get as many people as possible to just pay up and settle. The scam got deeper and deeper the more you looked, including forged signatures, clear evidence that the main actors behind Prenda -- John Steele and Paul Hansmeier -- were uploading their own works as a honeypot, while pretending to represent clients that they themselves owned through various shell companies -- which they denied owning. It went on and on and on. And on and on and on. Things really went sideways almost four years ago when Judge Otis Wright in California was the first judge to put much of this together, and called all of them to court, where everyone pleaded the fifth (yes, lawyers were pleading the fifth in a case they themselves brought). In response, Judge Wright referrred the case to law enforcement, leading many people to ask over the past four years how it was these guys weren't in jail (and, in fact, they continued to file lawsuits, reprising the same scheme but with ADA shakedowns.

Court after court after court has slammed Prenda, and ordered Hansmeier and Steele (partner 3, Paul Duffy, died in the middle of all of this) to pay up lots of money. Of course, in response to that, there were further accusations of illegally hiding money, bogus trusts, a questionable bankruptcy claim and more. And, yet, they still were not in jail. Oh, and we didn't even mention the various ethics investigations that recently suspended Hansmeier's license.

Ken "Popehat" White -- who as a former Assistant US Attorney and current criminal lawyer -- has kept saying that the wheels of justice turn slowly, but they do turn. Back in May, White noted that it appeared that ofifcials were getting mighty close to filing charges against Hansmeier and Steele, based on some evidence he had seen, suggesting the investigation was wrapping up. And the wheels continued to turn... until earlier today when it was revealed that Steele and Hansmeier have both been indicted and arrested in connection with the Prenda scam.

You can read the indictment or Ken White's excellent analysis of it. As White notes, the indictment is incredibly thorough. We've written about a number of indictments in the past in which law enforcement is fairly lax on details. This is not one of those cases. The overview gives a really good summary of everything:

Between 2011 and 2014, defendants Paul R. HANSMEIER and John L.
STEELE orchestrated an elaborate scheme to fraudulently obtain millions of dollars in
copyright lawsuit settlements by deceiving state and federal courts throughout the country.
In order to carry out the scheme, the defendants used sham entities to obtain copyrights to
pornographic movies--some of which they filmed themselves--and then uploaded those
movies to file-sharing websites in order to lure people to download the movies. To learn
the identities of the people caught in the trap they constructed, HANSMEIER and STEELE
filed specious copyright infringement lawsuits and fraudulently procured permission from
courts to send subpoenas to internet service providers for subscriber information associated
with the IP addresses used to download their pornographic movies. After receiving this
information, the defendants--through extortionate letters and phone calls--threatened the
subscribers with enormous financial penalties and public embarrassment unless the
subscribers agreed to pay a settlement, all the while concealing their collusion in the alleged
copyright infringement. When courts restricted their ability to sue multiple individuals in
the same lawsuit, the defendants shifted tactics. They filed lawsuits falsely alleging that
computer systems purportedly belonging to their sham clients had been infiltrated by
hackers, and then recruited ruse defendants against whom they brought these illusory
"hacking" lawsuits. Finally, when courts became suspicious of the defendants' tactics
and motives, the defendants began a long process of lies and deceit designed to conceal the
truth and deflect responsibility from themselves. In total, the defendants obtained
approximately. $6,000,000 made possible by the fraudulent copyright lawsuits they peddled
to courts throughout the country

I believe the $6 million number is new. But everything else in there we've covered in the past. The lawsuit names some people by initials only -- but who are easily identifiable if you've been following the saga. M.L. is likely Mark Lutz the "paralegal" who was involved in many of these cases, and was a figurehead owner of some of the sham corporations. You may remember him from one of the earliest Prenda stories we had, where Lutz "appeared" in court as a "corporate representative" of one of Prenda's "clients" and yet knew nothing at all about the company he was supposed "representing." That story also involved an appearance by John Steele who claimed he was there just observing, but which the judge immediately became suspicious about.

P.H. is likely to be Peter Hansmeier, Paul's brother, whose name has appeared at times in connection with the Prenda scam and had been described as the technology person tracking down who was downloading the files in question. The indictment also mentions P.D. who is obviously Paul Duffy, the official owner of Prenda Law, but who was always sort of the third wheel of the operation before dying just as all the mess was unfolding. A.C. is clearly Alan Cooper, named here as "an acquaintance of Steele," but who was a caretaker for some Steele properties, and whose signature Steele forged on documents pretending to own AF Holdings, one of the bogus shell companies he set up. B.G. is almost certain Brett Gibbs, a California lawyer who filed a bunch of Prenda lawsuits early on, but was one of the first to reveal details once judges started to catch on.

Perhaps the most interesting part of the indictment is it details multiple lies that Team Prenda told under penalty of perjury or under oath to various courts. It's a pretty long and detailed list. It includes filings by Mark Lutz and Brett Gibbs, which the indictment claims were all done, under penalty of perjury, at the direction of Steele and Hansmeier -- so they don't even get off for trying to keep their names off these documents.

Based on all this, they're facing a bunch of charges, for mail fraud, wire fraud, conspiracy to commit money laundering (involving the transactions to hide money from courts) and conspiracy to commit and suborn perjury.

As White rightly reminds us, an indictment is just a bunch of allegations, not yet proven, but having followed Team Prenda and all these actions for many years, the feds seem to have clearly figured out what was going on, and appear to have the evidence to back up many of those claims. Things don't look good for Steele and Hansmeier. According to the Minneapolis Star Tribune, US Attorney Andrew Luger called a press conference to announce all of this and call out the actions of Steele and Hansmeier.

"The defendants in this case are charged with devising a scheme that casts doubt on the integrity of our profession," Luger said in prepared remarks. "The conduct of these defendants was outrageous — they used deceptive lawsuits and unsuspecting judges to extort millions from vulnerable defendants. Our courts are halls of justice where fairness and the rule of law triumph, and my office will use every available resource to stop corrupt lawyers from abusing our system of justice."

Turns out that when you abuse the judicial system to shake people down... people aren't going to be too happy about that. Of course, now we have to wonder if the other giant copyright troll, Malibu Media, may be facing similar issues going forward...

from the goes-around-comes-around dept

In a bit of an early Christmas present for the Internet, Turing Pharmaceuticals CEO Martin Shkreli was arrested early Thursday morning for securities fraud (less than a day after Bloomberg had a big article about what a stock trading savant he was). According to reports, the Internet's least favorite human being had been under investigation since January for illegally taking stock from a biotechnology company he started in 2011 (Retrophin) to pay off unrelated debts, using a number of shell companies:

"...federal prosecutors accused Shkreli of engaging in a complicated shell game after his defunct hedge fund, MSMB Capital Management, lost millions. He is alleged to have made secret payoffs and set up sham consulting arrangements. A New York lawyer, Evan Greebel, was also arrested early Thursday. He's accused of conspiring with Shkreli in part of the scheme."

Turing and Shkreli came to fame for raising the price of Daraprim, the preferred treatment for a parasitic condition known as toxoplasmosis, some 5000% (from $13.50 to $750 per pill). After the much maligned CEO then appeared to backpedal and promise a price reduction for the drug, Turing released a highly dodgy press statement right before the Thanksgiving holiday making it abundantly clear that wouldn't be happening. On a positive note, Shkreli's behavior has prompted a much-needed examination of pharmaceutical industry business practices, and specifically the practice of jacking up prices on previously inexpensive generics.

Shkreli's name then remained in the headlines after it was discovered he'd purchased the only copy of the Wu-Tang Clan album Once Upon a Time in Shaolin for the rock-bottom price of $2 million -- months before his rise to "fame." And in a recent interview on the album's purchase, Shkreli tries to vaguely imply that the entire Turing pharmaceutical shit show has been performance art:

"To me, what I’m doing right now in the media,” Shkreli continues, “raising prices, all this shit, believe what you want, but it’s interesting. It gets people talking. At the end of the day, that’s what art is.

Well, maybe less like art and more like bad fiction. Bad fiction about a greedy toddler getting what's owed, and just in time for the holiday season.

from the this-is-infuriating dept

We talk a lot about police overreacting to things, but this takes things to a new and ridiculous level. The Dallas Morning News released a story last night about police in Irving, Texas, arresting 14-year old Ahmed Mohamed, a freshman in high school, for building a digital clock and bringing it in to school to show his teachers. Ahmed likes to tinker and build electronics. This is the kind of thing you'd think the school and the community would want to encourage. But, instead, he was arrested and sent to a juvenile detention center, suspended from school and the police say they may charge him for making a "hoax bomb." Except it's a clock. He never said it was a bomb. He never implied it was a bomb. Just some teachers and the police freaked out about it.

He kept the clock inside his school bag in English class, but the teacher complained when the alarm beeped in the middle of a lesson. Ahmed brought his invention up to show her afterward.

“She was like, it looks like a bomb,” he said.

“I told her, ‘It doesn’t look like a bomb to me.’”

The teacher kept the clock. When the principal and a police officer pulled Ahmed out of sixth period, he suspected he wouldn’t get it back.

They led Ahmed into a room where four other police officers waited. He said an officer he’d never seen before leaned back in his chair and remarked: “Yup. That’s who I thought it was.”

Ahmed felt suddenly conscious of his brown skin and his name — one of the most common in the Muslim religion. But the police kept him busy with questions.

The bell rang at least twice, he said, while the officers searched his belongings and questioned his intentions. The principal threatened to expel him if he didn’t make a written statement, he said.

“They were like, ‘So you tried to make a bomb?’” Ahmed said.

“I told them no, I was trying to make a clock.”

“He said, ‘It looks like a movie bomb to me.’”

The incredible thing is that the police flat out admit that he never claimed it was a bomb, but they're still considering charging him with making a hoax bomb.

Ahmed never claimed his device was anything but a clock, said police spokesman James McLellan. And police have no reason to think it was dangerous. But officers still didn’t believe Ahmed was giving them the whole story.

“We have no information that he claimed it was a bomb,” McLellan said. “He kept maintaining it was a clock, but there was no broader explanation.”

Perhaps there was no broader explanation because none is needed.

Even more ridiculous: they handcuffed this kid (wearing a NASA t-shirt, by the way) and walked him through the school as they took him away. This picture is shameful.

The school has now doubled down on this move, by sending a letter to parents at the school congratulating themselves for this whole thing:

While we do not have any threats to our school community, we want you to be aware that the Irving Police Department responded to a suspicious-looking item on campus yesterday. We are pleased to report that after the police department's assessment, the item discovered at school did not pose a threat to your child's safety.

Our school is cooperating fully with the ongoing police investigation, and we are handling the situation in accordance with the Irving ISD Student Code of Conduct and applicable laws. Please rest assured that we will always take necessary steps to keep our school as safe as possible.

Even worse... the school is using this as a "teaching moment" telling parents to tell their kids to report any "suspicious" things. Like brown kids being curious and inventing cool shit:

I recommend using this opportunity to talk with your child about the Student Code of Conduct and specifically not bringing items to school that are prohibited. Also, this is a good time to remind your child how important it is to immediately report any suspicious items and/or suspicious behavior they observe to any school employee so we can address it right away. We will always take necessary precautions to protect our students.

And by "address" it, apparently, they mean arrest bright kids for being curious and gifted.

The whole "bomb hoax" thing based on authorities getting confused about a non-bomb reminds me of that time, back in 2007, when Cartoon Network tried to promote Adult Swim with light up boxes of various characters placed around Boston -- and because some people freaked out and the city was shut down, Boston's mayor declared the marketing stunt a "bomb hoax." Once again, if someone is building something that you mistake for a bomb, and they had no intention of passing it off as a bomb, nor does it actually look like a bomb, it's not a bomb hoax. At all. And you look ridiculous calling it out as such.

And, of course, you look that much more ridiculous when you not only overreact like this, but do it against a clearly intelligent and talented teenager who likes to tinker with electronics.

Update: A picture of the clock has now been released. Nothing about it changes the story at all.

from the that's-one-way-to-do-it dept

Over the weekend in Paris there was a so-called "Unity March" in response to last week's Charlie Hebdo attack. The photographs from the march were striking -- even if the famed photo of many world leaders holding hands and marching together turned out to a photo op on a closed street, rather than with the rest of the marchers. And, of course, this was all a facade. Many of the leaders who were there oversee governments that don't believe in free speech or a free press at all. Here, for example, is Jillian York trying to figure out if any of the leaders truly support freedom of expression.

And, to just put a big underline on the whole thing, just days later, France has arrested a famous and controverisal French comedian, Dieudonné, who has quite a reputation for his outspoken anti-semitism. The arrest was over a Facebook post that Dieudonné put up that basically mocked the "Je Suis Charlie" campaign that had become the rallying cry following the Charlie Hebdo attack, and instead indicated that he identified more with Amédy Coulibaly, a gunman who killed four people at a Jewish supermarket on Friday.

Dieudonné's views may be offensive, ridiculous or despicable, but it's much more offensive, ridiculous and despicable to have him arrested for a comment on Facebook. And, it's even more ridiculous to do it when his comment concerns the way people were expressing support for freedom of the press and freedom of expression.

To then immediately arrest someone for using that freedom to give a counter-view, just seems ridiculous.

And while it's the most high profile, Dieudonné is hardly the only target, apparently. According to the BBC, France has really ramped up attacks on free speech in response to all this damn support of free speech:

The justice ministry said earlier that 54 cases had been opened since the murders of 17 people in Paris last week. Of those, 37 cases involved condoning terrorism and 12 were for threatening to carry out terrorist acts.

Some fast-track custodial sentences have already been handed down under anti-terror legislation passed last November

A man of 22 was jailed on Tuesday for a year for posting a video mocking one of the three murdered policemen

A drunk driver was given four years in prison after making threats against the police who arrested him

Three men in their twenties were jailed in Toulouse for condoning terrorism

A man of 20 was jailed in Orleans for shouting "long live the Kalash[(nikov]" at police in a shopping center

Hey, France, I don't quite think you're getting the message. "I support free speech... so long as it is free speech that I sort of agree with" kind of misses the point. The views of some of these people expressing support for killers or terrorists or hatred towards certain types of people is speech that I find, personally, to be despicable. But those expressing it should be allowed to express it -- broadcasting their own confusion and ignorance to the world, and allowing others to counter that speech. Arresting people based on their speech only reinforces the ridiculous idea that they've come upon some truth or that they're speaking "truth to power." They're not. They're speaking nonsense, but in a free society we allow nonsense to be spoken.

Dispatch started receiving calls, including one from Kansas, the FBI, and Fox News who told Zion they heard it from a caller in Washington.

Mark was hauled off to the police station and questioned by Zion police. Considering recent events, one could be forgiven for assuming Mark is still in jail, facing terrorism charges and unaffordable bail. Oddly enough, the Zion police did a little investigating and realized Mark posed a threat to absolutely no one.

“There is no credibility to the threat. He has no weapons and no access to weapons,” he said.

The police took Mark's "threat" seriously, which isn't a problem. Law enforcement should investigate incidents like these to determine whether there's any seriousness to the threat. But unlike other police departments and prosecutors, no one attempted to pursue excessive criminal charges despite being unable to find anything that indicated the statement should be taken seriously.

The Zion Police still charged Mark with a crime, however -- disorderly conduct, a Class 4 felony. This seems excessive considering the police didn't find Mark's threat credible. Most likely this charge was issued as a result of the switchboard lighting up as "concerned" Tweeters nationwide reported the tweet. If you've got the perp down at the station and the FBI is on the phone, you can't very well let him walk away with nothing more than a "turn on brain before tweeting" warning.

Still, things could have been much, much worse. It's been noted that you can't "fix stupid." However, what we've seen lately indicates you can arraign it on terrorism charges.

from the 'terrorist'-gambit-fails;-adds-+20-to-Cammy-Dee's-street-cred dept

Cameron D'Ambrosio, the teen charged with "communicating terrorist threats" via some daft rap lyrics posted to his Facebook profile, is apparently no longer a threat to the people of Methuen, MA, and parts beyond. Facing a possible 20-year-sentence for his inclusion of such explosive terms as "White House," "murder charge" and "Boston bombinb" in his one-man online rap battle, D'Ambrosio has been held without bail since May 2nd. As of Thursday night, however, D'Ambrosio is free to killterrorize rhyme again. And, as an added bonus, he now has something in common with many of the rappers he clearly aspires to be: time served.

An Essex County grand jury declined Thursday to bring an indictment against Cameron D’Ambrosio, 18, so prosecutors will formally file a motion to drop the charge of making a bomb or hijack threat, said Carrie Kimball Monahan, a spokeswoman for the district attorney.

The D.A.'s office has declined to comment on the grand jury's decision, and D'Ambrosio and his lawyer are probably saving some choice words for a press conference. But that hasn't stopped the man behind this overreaction and the ensuing farcical approximation of criminal "justice." Here's what Police Chief Joe Solomon had to say in his press release (delivered via Facebook).

"I have just been advised of the Grand Jury decision from earlier today, where the grand jury did not issue an indictment on the high school threats case. Although we disagree with the Grand Jury's decision we respect it. Several judiciary levels have confirmed the probable cause in this case as it has worked it's way through the criminal justice system. We will continue to take all threats against our community seriously and will always utilize due diligence in our investigation."

Thank you Chief Solomon

A few things to note:

1. Suddenly it's only a "high school threats case," rather than the much more dangerous-sounding "communicating terroristic threats."

2. Shouldn't the "probable cause" have been determined before D'Ambrosio was even arrested?

Matthew Segal, the legal director at the ACLU of Massachusetts – who has worked on similar first amendment cases, though not this one – says it does not appear that D'Ambrosio's Facebook post rose to the level of a "true threat" warranting an investigation, which the grand jury has found as well. Segal notes that D'Ambrosio's words didn't target anybody or anything specifically, which the Methuen police have also acknowledged.

D'Ambrosio still has one more date hanging over his head -- June 27th -- during which prosecutors may decide to bring other charges. This seems unlikely considering the District Attorney's office has already announced it will not be pursuing this case further. Just in case, supporters of D'Ambrosio, led by the Center for Rights (whose Free Cameron petition gathered over 90,000 votes), will be on hand to show their support for Cameron -- and the First Amendment.

Seven teenage students in North Carolina were arrested on Thursday and charged with a misdemeanor for throwing water balloons during a school prank. A parent was also arrested during the incident.

The seven boys, all between the ages of 16 and 17, threw balloons filled with tap water as an end-of-year prank at Enloe High School in Raleigh. The balloons were rumored to be filled with “other substances,” but Wake County Public School System spokeswoman Renee McCoy said “all indications” were that only water was used.

Six of the teens were charged with disorderly conduct. The seventh was charged with assault and battery for hitting a school security officer with a balloon.

You've got to respect the uniform -- even if that uniform is a 50/50 polyester/ugly blend. If other students, teachers and administration staff get hit, that's a paddlin' simple "disorderly conduct" (a.k.a., the cop's best friend). And if you can't respect the security guard's uniform, you had damn well better respect the boys in blue, or you'll get thrown to the ground for throwing water balloons.

Swell. An unarmed parent who's concerned that someone (NOT A COP) might get hurt is handcuffed, threatened with a taser and charged for "causing trouble," which apparently goes on the books as "second degree trespassing."

The mother of an Enloe High School student has filed a complaint with the Raleigh Police Department after an officer threw her son to the ground Thursday as police responded to a water balloon battle at the school.

Call me naive, but I never thought I'd ever read a sentence this incongruous in my life: "...as police responded to a water balloon battle..." Tase me. Tase me now, lord. At least it wasn't a water pistol fight. Martial law would have been declared and the National Guard called in.

Here's the school's official statement on the "event."

Renee McCoy, a representative of Wake County Public Schools, said they rely on the training of the Raleigh Police Department in these situations. "We leave those decisions up to Raleigh PD," McCoy said.

Punt.

Seven kids with misdemeanors on their records ("released on bail" -- I am not kidding) for throwing weaponized water. I'm not really sure what schools are teaching kids at this point -- that every minor infraction must be dealt with swiftly and brutally? That violating school policies is a criminal offence? Whatever they're trying to teach by jettisoning critical thinking and replacing it with zero tolerance cops on speed dial, it's not getting through. All students are going to learn is that school administration has farmed out its disciplinary responsibilities to a variety of humorless, uniformed thugs -- some private, some public -- and that there really is no crime too small.